Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:47:11 +0200 From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@...inelinux.org> To: Jörg Krause <jkrause@...teo.de> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: why is there no __MUSL__ macro? On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 13:00:09 +0200 Jörg Krause <jkrause@...teo.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to add support for the musl toolchain to FFmpeg. > > FFmpeg needs support for library features defined in POSIX.1-2001 with > XSI extension and the standards below. Currently configure probes the > host and target libc by checking for defined macros like __GLIBC__ and > __UCLIBC__. In case of glibc and uclibc it sets -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=600 > properly. > > After this it checks for some combinations of hardware and the probed > libc to set some more compile options, if necessary. > > I know that musl does not have a macro __MUSL__ and I have read the > explanation. However, I don't understand what's meant by "[..] it's a > bug to assume a certain implementation has particular properties rather > than testing." and how does it affect the way FFmpeg probes for the libc. > > What could be a solution which supports musl? > > Many thanks! > Jörg This is what we do on alpine linux: http://git.alpinelinux.org/cgit/aports/tree/main/ffmpeg/fix-defines.patch --- ffmpeg-1.2.2.orig/libavutil/error.c +++ ffmpeg-1.2.2/libavutil/error.c @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ */ #undef _GNU_SOURCE +#define _XOPEN_SOURCE 600 #include "avutil.h" #include "avstring.h" #include "common.h"
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.